Note: TMP Government is dedicated to communicating on behalf
of all of the players within the government community. In addition to
serving the citizen and recruitment communications needs of government
clients, TMP Government serves the communications needs of contractors
and associations. During the present focus on deficit reduction, the
entire government community shares a common concern of giving the
taxpayer the best possible value for dollars spent.
Suppose the Federal programs you serve were subject to quick
up-or-down vote. You’d have a brief time to make a case for their
purpose, performance and results. Then you might be subject to some
questions. Finally, you’d have a final chance to make a summation and a
plea for the program to be continued. This court, however, is not merely
a supposition. Between now and Thanksgiving, 12 people hold the fate of
government spending in their hands.
The “jurors” are members of the bipartisan Congressional “super
committee” charged “with the goal of reducing the deficit by at least
$1.5 trillion between 2012 and 2021.” They have until November 23 to
find $1.2 trillion in cuts. Then Congress has to act to pass them in a
majority vote by Dec. 23. If the jury is hung or Congress can’t meet the
deadline, a set amount of $1.2 trillion will kick in automatically. In
other words, some $100 billion a year in Federally funded activities
will vanish, divided equally between domestic and defense spending.
What would you like your company or agency to say in the face of what
Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta calls the “doomsday mechanism,” which
would take funds from every department regardless of needs? TMP
Government suggests that the best way to show that you’re needed is to
show why you’re strategically necessary to America’s priorities. That’s a
difficult task because there’s no sure consensus as to what those
priorities really are.
What does America, Inc. really need?
Most of us would agree that the Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) is necessary. We may not like taking off our shoes
and putting 3.4-ounce bottles in quart-size bags, but we understand the
need. In fact, the 9/11 Commission report card
issued in late August may make us feel that many more dollars should go
to similar protective measures. The report says that nine out of the
original 41 recommendations have not been fulfilled.
Co-chair and former congressman Lee Hamilton even says that airport
security, which allowed 19 terrorists access to aircrafts on that day in
2001, still isn't completely effective: "Our conclusion is that
despite 10 years of working on the problem the detection systems still
falls short in critical ways."
Does that make you want to cut the TSA budget? Or pull back on
innovation? Or hire fewer screeners and Federal Air Marshals? Or stint
on their benefits and training?
We'll grant that most situations are not quite that dramatic. Yet the
chances are that you can make a case for your contribution by linking
it to a relevant national priority. But what are the agreed-upon
priorities?
Fitting into a plan that doesn't exist
The private sector has steadily learned how to prioritize
needs. Companies monitor trends and opportunities, formulating
objectives. When the repeated shocks of market changes and business
cycles make CEOs wary of once tried and true avenues of investment, they
look elsewhere. More and more often, they look at their resources and
reinvent themselves in the light of present realities. They try to
anticipate market reaction early on and change course. In brief, they
have a strategy.
So if a corporation wants to reduce costs, it will ask questions:
What activities are likely to grow and bring in more revenue? Which
markets are mature and which are in decline? Where do we have too many
people and where are there not enough? What data shows the best course
and which indicators can mark our progress to a new goal. Strategy
guides the decision-making and priorities justify the choices.
There’s no such luck in the public sector. While individual agencies
often have a planning process, America, Inc. does not. Each year, the
President presents a budget to Congress for authorization and
appropriation. After deliberation, the government rolls on.
“By contrast,” says David Walker, the nation’s former top auditor,
“the U.S. government does not know what it really wants to do.” Walker
served as Comptroller General and Government Accountability Office (GAO)
head under both Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. A leading
deficit hawk, he traverses the country to make people aware that our
fiscal situation is even more serious than most politicians would agree.
Yet Walker’s method is polls apart from sequestration.
In his best-selling Comeback America: Turning the Country Around and Restoring Fiscal Responsibility
(Random House: 2010), Walker points out that “our federal government,
which is the largest single entity on earth, has never had a strategic
plan, and it’s been in business since 1789!” He clarifies, “Washington
takes in trillions and spends trillions more, but it does not have a
comprehensive, integrated, forward-looking plan, based on a set of
principles and priorities and the outcomes it hopes to achieve. Nor does
it have a way to measure its overall success.”
You might wonder then how you can be relevant to a plan that doesn’t
exist. After all, we don’t live in a top-down planned economy. Each of
the 12 members of the super committee, much less Congress, has their own
priorities and agendas. They are accountable not only to the nation but
their constituencies, where citizens rely on Federal dollars for
employment.
On the other hand, thinking strategically at a very baseline level
can help you determine your messaging. It can take you beyond a value
proposition or elevator speech (though those are essential) into showing
relevance to your customer and to the influencers on the Hill.
Thinking like the super committee
David Walker says, “We must ask basic questions about every major
Federal program and policy.” One way to do that might be to look at
your government programs through the eyes of a lawmaker who has no
vested interest in your existence but has a willingness to hear what
you have to say. Ask yourself the questions that the legislator would
ask you:
- Are the reasons for your program’s creation still pertinent to its continued existence?
- Have you continued to change with the times?
- What are your specific objectives (outcomes) and what metrics determine if you reach them?
- Is your program a priority now? Will it be a year from now? Five years?
- Is your program affordable?
- Are you deploying efficiencies that save the country money?
When you can answer these questions, you can accomplish marketing
and recruitment communications at a more meaningful level for all of
your constituencies, from the legislator to the agency decision-maker
to the job seeker, who wants to make a difference. You will also be
more prepared for today’s two-way social communications, where you can
confidently “join the conversation” about our nation’s future.
TMP Government’s branding process can help you work through
these issues. For more information on how we can serve your B2G and
employer communications, please contact Mark Havard at Mark.Havard@TMPgovernment.com or give him a call at 703-269-0144.
Back